Blueberry Fruitworm Factsheet

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Blueberry Fruitworm Factsheet Fruitworm Factsheet John C. Wise, Ryan VanderPoppen and Rufus Isaacs Cranberry Fruitworm Cherry Fruitworm Acrobasis vaccinii Riley (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) Grapholita packardi Zeller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae Introduction Cranberry Fruitworm (CBFW) and Cherry Fruitworm (CFW) are the two significant Lepidopteran pests directly attacking the fruit of blueberries in commercial fields in Michigan. Both pests have similar life histories, which makes it possible to address them together in one fact-sheet. Both CBFW and CFW are native to North America, as are the blueberries they infest. Without decisive management one or both of these pests can cause significant economic injury to the blueberry crop. This fact-sheet will discuss general life stages of CBFW and CFW, as well as Integrated Pest Management strategies for managing these pests in blueberries. Hosts Cranberry fruitworm can be found on blueberry, cranberry, and huckleberry where they feed on fruit (Immature Insects, Stehr). Hosts of Cherry fruitworm include apple, plum, cherry, rose, blueberry, hawthorn, and peach (Tree Fruit Insects, Howitt). Larvae feed in fruit or growing shoots. Identification Adults of CFW are grayish black and 5 to 6 mm in length (Figure 1). CBFW adults are about 11 mm in length. Forewings of CBFW are grayish brown, with two identifying whitish triangles. Eggs of CFW are flat, with a round to oval outline, and appear opaque (Figure 2). Upon maturity, the dark head capsule of the developing neonate is clearly visible within the egg (Figure 3). Eggs of CBFW are irregular shaped and initially appear as raised white scales. As they develop, CBFW eggs go through a progressive change of color from white to yellow to orange (Figure 4). Later, within 24 hours of hatching, the developing neonate’s head capsule can be seen as a darkened spot within the egg. After hatch the egg is clear white, and looks similar to a newly deposited egg. Larvae found within blueberry fruit in the month of June will be likely be either CBFW or CFW. CBFW larvae are pale yellowish green, and reach a length of 15 mm when fully developed (Figure 5). CFW larvae appear pink, are about 8 mm in length, and can be distinguished from CBFW by the presence on an anal comb.Hibernaculum of CFW are golden brown and about 6 mm in length. CBFW pupate within a hibernaculum that is about 10 mm in length, which will take the color of surrounding soil particles or detritus incorporated while building the structure (Figure 6). Life Cycle In blueberries, both CBFW and CFW go through a single generation per year. Adult emergence begins after the start of blueberry bloom and usually before early fruit set. In West Michigan adult flight normally begins in May and continues through early July for both species, as evidenced by pheromone trap catch data recorded at the Trevor Nichols Research Station (http://www.maes.msu.edu/ressta/tnrc/). Egg laying starts soon after the first fruit set, peaking in the first two weeks after 100 % petal fall. Although adult flight can continue into July, egg laying dissipates rapidly after mid-June. Both species prefer to oviposit within the calyx “cup” area of the fruit, though CBFW tend to lay eggs more strictly along the inside rim of the calyx. With favorable weather conditions, eggs hatch in 3 to 5 days. CFW tend to enter fruit in the calyx where they hatched, while CBFW tend to migrate out around the berry and enter adjacent to the stem, or on the “cheek” of the berry (Figure 7). One major difference between CFW and CBFW is the number of fruit that are infested within a single life-cycle. CBFW can enter up to 6 berries, while CFW generally enter 1 or 2 berries to complete development. With both species, feeding on immature green fruit causes premature ripening (bluing) of fruit. This characteristic makes infested fruit more readily identifiable. While feeding and moving between berries, CBFW produce a characteristic mass of webbed frass, filling the space in and around the fruit cluster. CFW also silk berries together when moving between fruit, but the frass stays entirely within the fruit, and the webbing is not as obvious. Upon reaching maturity, the larvae leave the berries and move to over-wintering sites. CBFW larvae migrate off the bushes and form a hibernaculum shallow in the soil using natural soil particles or other detritus. CFW larvae form a hibernaculum above ground, in a sheltered area on the bush or in surrounding weeds. Only after the winter cold period has been met, and the weather warms, will the larva in the hibernaculum begin to pupate. After being in the pupal stage for several weeks, the adults will emerge. This again correlates with blueberry bloom period, and mating and egg laying will soon follow for both species. Monitoring and Control Monitoring. The 3 practical phases to monitoring CBFW and CFW in blueberries include 1) monitoring adult trap catch, 2) scouting for eggs, and 3) scouting for larval infestations. 1) The emergence of adult males and moth flight can be monitored using sticky traps baited with female sex pheromone lures. Monitoring the emergence of adults provides two important pieces of information for pest management. First, the number of male adults caught in traps provides a relative estimate of population level and distribution within the field(s). Second, because egg laying typically begins shortly after initial adult emergence, adult catch in traps serves as an indicator for when egg monitoring should begin. 2) The second phase of monitoring fruitworms is scouting for eggs, which will provide the most reliable biofix for egg hatch timing and egg distribution in the field. Scouting for eggs should begin after there is some early blueberry fruit set and adult flight has commenced. Start by scouting along perimeter rows of blueberries that either have a history of fruitworm pressure or are adjacent to woods and/or abandoned blueberry fields. CBFW eggs tend to be laid between 3 ft and 5 ft high on bushes, and are often clustered such that when you find one there will be more in the near vicinity. Eggs can be seen in the calyx of fruit, and approximate age of CBFW eggs can be estimated by the progressive change of color from white to yellow to orange. CFW eggs are much more difficult than CBFW to see because of their flattened shape and opaque color. A 15-20X hand lens is helpful to see eggs and confirm a positive identification. 3) The third phase of monitoring fruitworm in blueberries is scouting for larval infestations. This is important for determining the effectiveness of the management strategy that has been utilized. In most cases a single injured berry will not show up at harvest as long as the larva is prevented from further infestation of the fruit cluster. Cultural control. “Clean cultivation will reduce the populations of cranberry fruitworm within a field significantly, but insecticide treatments may still be needed to achieve satisfactory control of this pest” (Highbush Blueberry Production Guide). Due to the premature coloring effect larvae have on the fruit, it may be possible to physically remove infested clusters in small acreage operations. Biological Control. As both CBFW and CFW are native insects, it is not surprising that there are a number of parasitic insects that attack them in their egg and/or larval stages. These include parasitic wasps and flies in the families Trichogrammatidae, Ichneumonidae, and Braconidae. Selecting insecticides that have lower toxicity to these parasitoids (like IGRs and B.t.s) will enhance the effectiveness of biological control. Chemical Control. When using chemical control both timing and good coverage of the fruit is critical. Once the commencement of egg laying is determined through field monitoring, there is an approximate 3 to 5 day window before egg hatch begins. Some insecticides (i.e; like juvenoid Insect Growth Regulators) are primarily active on eggs of CBFW and CFW and should be applied during this heavy egg-laying period. Egg hatch often occurs before 100% petal fall, such that insecticides toxic to pollinators should not be used. B.t.’s and most Insect Growth Regulators (IGR’s) do not affect bees, so can be used during late bloom / early fruit set period. Larvae are the most susceptible to chemical control for a short period between the time that eggs hatch and the larvae enter the fruit. After successful larval entry the fruit acts as a refuge from contact with chemical residues on the surface. In the case of CFW complete coverage is critical because larvae may never leave the calyx cup before entering fruit. In the case of CBFW it is possible to present an additional toxic dose to the larvae as they move from one berry to another, though the larvae are by then larger and more difficult to kill. References: Pritts, M.P., Hancock, J.F. 1992, Highbush Bluberry Production Guide (NRAES-55). Howitt, A.J. 1993, Common Tree Fruit Pests Michigan State University Extension. Stehr. F.W. 1987. Immature Insects. Kendall / Hunt Publishing Company. Figure 1. Adults of CFW (left) and CBFW (right). Figure 2. CBFW (top) and CFW eggs Figure 3. Eggs of CFW are flat, with a round to oval outline, and appear opaque. Upon maturity, the dark head capsule of the developing neonate is clearly visible within the egg. Figure 4. Eggs of CBFW are irregular shaped and initially appear as raised white scales. As they develop, CBFW eggs go through a progressive change of color from white to yellow to orange. Figure 5. CBFW (top) and CFW larvae. Figure 6. CBFW (left) and CFW pupae. Figure 7.
Recommended publications
  • JAVELIN WG® Spray Must Be Deposited at the Larval Feeding Site
    For Control of Insect Pests of Vegetables, Fruit and Field Crops ACTIVE INGREDIENT: Bacillus thuringiensis, subspecies kurstaki strain SA-11 solids, spores, and Lepidopteran active toxins* .............................................................................. 85.0% OTHER INGREDIENTS: ........................................................................................ 15.0% TOTAL 100.0% * The percentage active ingredient does not indicate product performance and potency measurements are not federally standardized. KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN CAUTION See additional precautionary statements EPA REG. NO.: 70051-66 Lot No. EPA EST. NO.: Net Contents: Manufactured by: Certis USA LLC ESL 20160825 9145 Guilford Road, Suite 175 rev20191112 Columbia, MD 21046 This is a Specimen Label. It may not reflect the most-recent approved label for use in your state. Always refer to the label on the product packaging for approved use instructions. Please contact your Certis sales representative for more information. Page 1 of 17 PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENTS HAZARDS TO HUMANS AND DOMESTIC ANIMALS CAUTION. Harmful if absorbed through skin. Avoid contact with skin, eyes or clothing. Wash thoroughly with soap and water after handling and before eating, drinking, chewing gum, using tobacco, or using the toilet. Remove and wash contaminated clothing before reuse. Harmful if inhaled. Avoid breathing spray mist. Prolonged or frequently repeated skin contact may cause allergic reactions in some individuals. FIRST AID If on skin or clothing: Take off contaminated clothing. Rinse skin immediately with plenty of water for 15-20 minutes. If in eyes: Hold eye open and rinse slowly and gently with water for 15-20 minutes. Remove contact lenses, if present, after the first 5 minutes, then continue rinsing eye. If inhaled: Move person to fresh air.
    [Show full text]
  • Multi-Species Mating Disruption in Cranberries (Ericales: Ericaceae): Early Evidence Using a Flowable Emulsion
    Journal of Insect Science (2017) 17(2): 54; 1–6 doi: 10.1093/jisesa/iex025 Research article Multi-Species Mating Disruption in Cranberries (Ericales: Ericaceae): Early Evidence Using a Flowable Emulsion Shawn A. Steffan,1,2,3 Elissa M. Chasen,1,2 Annie E. Deutsch,2,4 and Agenor Mafra-Neto5 1USDA-ARS Vegetable Crops Research Unit, 1630 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706 ([email protected]; elissa.chasen@ ars.usda.gov), 2Department of Entomology, University of Wisconsin, 1630 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706 (steffan@entomology. wisc.edu; [email protected]; [email protected]), 3Corresponding author, e-mail: ([email protected]), 4Door County University of Wisconsin-Extension, 421 Nebraska St., Sturgeon Bay, WI 54235 ([email protected]), and 5ISCA Technologies, Incorporated, 1230 W. Spring St., Riverside, CA 92507 ([email protected]) Subject Editor: Cesar Rodriguez-Saona Received 11 October 2016; Editorial decision 11 March 2017 Abstract Pheromone-based mating disruption has proven to be a powerful pest management tactic in many cropping systems. However, in the cranberry system, a viable mating disruption program does not yet exist. There are commercially available pheromones for several of the major pests of cranberries, including the cranberry fruit- worm, Acrobasis vaccinii Riley (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) and blackheaded fireworm, Rhopobota naevana (Hu¨ bner) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Previous studies have shown that mating disruption represents a promising approach for R. naevana management although carrier and delivery technologies have remained unresolved. The present study examined the suitability of Specialized Pheromone & Lure Application Technology (SPLAT; ISCA Technologies, Inc., Riverside, CA), a proprietary wax and oil blend, to serve as a pheromone carrier in the cranberry system.
    [Show full text]
  • Highbush Blueberry: Cultivation, Protection, Breeding and Biotechnology
    The European Journal of Plant Science and Biotechnology ©2007 Global Science Books Highbush Blueberry: Cultivation, Protection, Breeding and Biotechnology Daniele Prodorutti1* • Ilaria Pertot2 • Lara Giongo3 • Cesare Gessler2 1 Plant Protection Department, IASMA Research Centre, Via E. Mach 1, 38010 San Michele all’Adige (TN), Italy 2 Safecrop Centre, IASMA Research Centre, Via E. Mach 1, 38010 San Michele all’Adige (TN), Italy 3 Agrifood Quality Department, IASMA Research Centre, Via E. Mach 1, 38010 San Michele all’Adige (TN), Italy Corresponding author : * [email protected] ABSTRACT Highbush blueberry is one of the most commercially significant berry crops. It is mainly cultivated in the United States and Canada, but also in Europe, Australia, Chile and New Zealand. Production of this crop is likely to increase in response to increased consumer demand for healthy foods, including the antioxidant-rich blueberry. This review describes several issues and developments in sustainable blueberry farming, including agronomical and cultural techniques (mulching, irrigation, the beneficial effects of mycorrhizae and fertilization), disease management (biology and control of common and emerging diseases), pest management, pollinators (effects on fruit set and production), conventional breeding and molecular techniques for examining and engineering blueberry germplasm. This paper describes past problems and current challenges associated with the commercial production of highbush blueberry, as well as new approaches and techniques for
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    UNIVERSITY THOUGHT doi:10.5937/univtho7-15336 Publication in Natural Sciences, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2017, pp. 1-27. Original Scientific Paper A CONTRIBUTION TO KNOWLEDGE OF THE BALKAN LEPIDOPTERA. SOME PYRALOIDEA (LEPIDOPTERA: CRAMBIDAE & PYRALIDAE) ENCOUNTERED RECENTLY IN SOUTHERN SERBIA, MONTENEGRO, THE REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA AND ALBANIA COLIN W. PLANT1*, STOYAN BESHKOV2, PREDRAG JAKŠIĆ3, ANA NAHIRNIĆ2 114 West Road, Bishops Stortford, Hertfordshire, CM23 3QP, England 2National Museum of Natural History, Sofia, Bulgaria 3Faculty of Natural Science and Mathematics, University of Priština, Kosovska Mitrovica, Serbia ABSTRACT Pyraloidea (Lepidoptera: Crambidae & Pyralidae) were sampled in the territories of southern Serbia, Montenegro, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Albania on a total of 53 occasions during 2014, 2016 and 2017. A total of 173 species is reported here, comprising 97 Crambidae and 76 Pyralidae. Based upon published data, 29 species appear to be new to the fauna of Serbia, 5 species are new to the fauna of Macedonia and 37 are new to the fauna of Albania. The data are discussed. Keywords: Faunistics, Serbia, Montenegro, Republic of Macedonia, Albania, Pyraloidea, Pyralidae, Crambidae. of light trap. Some sites were visited on more than one occasion; INTRODUCTION others were sampled once only. Pyraloidea (Lepidoptera: Crambidae and Pyralidae) have As a by-product of this work, all remaining material from been examined in detail in the neighbouring territory of the the traps was returned to Sofia where Dr Boyan Zlatkov was Republic of Bulgaria and the results have been published by one given the opportunity to extract the Tortricoidea. The remaining of us (Plant, 2016). That work presented data for the 386 species material was retained and sent by post to England after the end of and 3 additional subspecies known from that country.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. EPA, Pesticide Product Label, JAVELIN WG, 03/25/2008
    . '. .3 - d-S-J-oog- . UNITED S(=~ES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AG('~CY Christine A. Dively MAR 25 2008 Director of Regulatory Affairs Certis USA 9145 Guilford Road, Suite 175 Columbia, MD 21046 Dear Ms. Dively: Subject: Javelin WG (EPA Reg. No. 70051-66) Label submitted for Bt reregistration !' . As part of the reregistration ofBt microbial pesticides, the Agency has issued a stamped approved label for each reregistered product. Part of the labeling that was required for reregistrationwas an Environmental Hazards statement containing language to protect endangered or threatened Lepidoptera. After finalizing reregistration of the subject product, the Agency was made aware that registrants were given an erroneous version of the Environmental Hazard statement to include on product labels. .The correct statement should read as follows: "This product must not be applied aerially within 1/4 mile of any habitats of endangered or threatened Lepidoptera. No manual application can be made within 300 feet of any threatened or endangered Lepidoptera." . In light of this error, EPA has re-stamped the label forthe subject product with the corrected Environmental Hazards text. A copy of the label is enclosed for yoUr records. If you have any questions, please contact Alan Reynolds of my staff at (703) 605-0515 (e-mail: [email protected]). Sincerely, Sheryl Reilly, Ph.D., Branch Chief Microbial Pesticides Branch (7511P) Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division Enclosure CONCURRENCES' SYMBOL .. '/ S"lj () '. SURNAME ~ ··4····· ·lJ..~·: .....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ecosystem Services Provided by Bats
    Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. ISSN 0077-8923 ANNALS OF THE NEW YORK ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Issue: The Year in Ecology and Conservation Biology Ecosystem services provided by bats Thomas H. Kunz,1 Elizabeth Braun de Torrez,1 Dana Bauer,2 Tatyana Lobova,3 and Theodore H. Fleming4 1Center for Ecology and Conservation Biology, Department of Biology, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts. 2Department of Geography, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts. 3Department of Biology, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia. 4Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona Address for correspondence: Thomas H. Kunz, Ph.D., Center for Ecology and Conservation Biology, Department of Biology, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215. [email protected] Ecosystem services are the benefits obtained from the environment that increase human well-being. Economic valuation is conducted by measuring the human welfare gains or losses that result from changes in the provision of ecosystem services. Bats have long been postulated to play important roles in arthropod suppression, seed dispersal, and pollination; however, only recently have these ecosystem services begun to be thoroughly evaluated. Here, we review the available literature on the ecological and economic impact of ecosystem services provided by bats. We describe dietary preferences, foraging behaviors, adaptations, and phylogenetic histories of insectivorous, frugivorous, and nectarivorous bats worldwide in the context of their respective ecosystem services. For each trophic ensemble, we discuss the consequences of these ecological interactions on both natural and agricultural systems. Throughout this review, we highlight the research needed to fully determine the ecosystem services in question. Finally, we provide a comprehensive overview of economic valuation of ecosystem services.
    [Show full text]
  • Series I. Correspondence, 1871-1894 Box 1 Folder 1 Darwin to Riley
    Special Collections at the National Agricultural Library: Charles Valentine Riley Collection Series I. Correspondence, 1871-1894 Box 1 Folder 1 Darwin to Riley. June 1, 1871. Letter from Charles Darwin to Riley thanking him for report and instructions on noxious insects. Downs, Beckerham, Kent (England). (handwritten copy of original). Box 1 Folder 2 Koble to Riley. June 30, 1874. Letter from John C. Koble giving physical description of chinch bugs and explaining how the bugs are destroying corn crops in western Kentucky. John C. Koble of L. S. Trimble and Co., Bankers. Box 1 Folder 3 Saunders to Riley. Nov. 12, 1874. William Saunders receipt to C. V. Riley for a copy of descriptions of two insects that baffle the vegetable carnivora. William Saunders, Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. Box 1 Folder 4 Young to Riley. Dec. 13, 1874. William Young describes the flat-headed borer and its effects on orchards during summer and winter seasons. From Palmyra Gate Co., Nebraska. Box 1 Folder 5 Saunders to Riley. Dec. 22, 1874. William Saunders receipt of notes of investigation on the insects associated with Sarracenia. William Saunders, Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. Box 1 Folder 6 Bonhaw to Riley. Jan. 19, 1875. L. N. Bonhaw requesting a copy of his Missouri report, for him to establish a manual or handbook on entomology, and to find out about an insect that deposits eggs. Subject: tomato worm, hawk moth. 1 http://www.nal.usda.gov/speccoll/ Special Collections at the National Agricultural Library: Charles Valentine Riley Collection Box 1 Folder 7 Holliday to Riley.
    [Show full text]
  • County Genus Species Species Author Common
    County Genus Species Species Author Common Name Tribe Subfamily Family Superfamily Lee County Achatia distincta Hubner,1813 Distinct Quaker Orthosiini Noctuinae Noctuidae Noctuoidea Lee County Acleris braunana (McDunnough, 1934) Tortricini Tortricinae Tortricidae Tortricoidea Lee County Acrobasis angusella Grote, 1880 Hickory Leafstem borer Moth Phycitini Phycitinae Pyralidae Pyraloidea Lee County Acrobasis palliolella Ragonot, 1887 Mantled Acrobasis Moth Phycitini Phycitinae Pyralidae Pyraloidea Lee County Acrobasis stigmella Dyar, 1908 Phycitini Phycitinae Pyralidae Pyraloidea Lee County Acrobasis tricolorella Grote, 1878 Destructive Pruneworm Moth Phycitini Phycitinae Pyralidae Pyraloidea Lee County Acrolophus arcanella (Clemens, 1849) (None) (None) Acrolophidae Tineoidea Lee County Acronicta exilis Grote, 1874 Exiled Dagger Moth (None) Acronictinae Noctuidae Noctuoidea Lee County Acronicta funeralis Grote and Robinson, 1866 Funerary Dagger Moth (None) Acronictinae Noctuidae Noctuoidea Lee County Acronicta haesitata (Grote, 1882) Hesitant Dagger Moth (None) Acronictinae Noctuidae Noctuoidea Lee County Acronicta hamamelis Guenee, 1852 Witch Hazel Dagger Moth (None) Acronictinae Noctuidae Noctuoidea Lee County Acronicta hasta Guenee, 1852 Speared Dagger Moth (None) Acronictinae Noctuidae Noctuoidea Lee County Acronicta impleta Walker, 1856 Nondescript Dagger Moth (None) Acronictinae Noctuidae Noctuoidea Lee County Acronicta increta Morrison, 1974 Raspberry Bud Dagger Moth (None) Acronictinae Noctuidae Noctuoidea Lee County Acronicta interrupta
    [Show full text]
  • Pyralidae, Phycitinae) in Tunisia
    Turkish Journal of Forestry | Türkiye Ormancılık Dergisi 2016, 17(Special Issue): 44-47 | Research article (Araştırma makalesi) Contribution to the bio-ecology of Acrobasis consociella (Hübner, 1813) (Pyralidae, Phycitinae) in Tunisia Olfa Ezzinea,b,*, Sonia Hammamia,b, Samir Dhahria, Mohamed Lahbib Ben Jamâaa Abstract: Q. coccifera is the characteristic species present in the north-eastern forest (Jebel Abderrahmane) and the north- western forest (Sejnane). At the end of April of 2005, a complete defoliation of more than 500 ha of evergreen shrubs of Jebel Abderrahmane caused by larvae of Orgyia trigotephras was observed. At the beginning of April 2010, a severe defoliation of a shrub-forest was noted in Sejnane, where about 2500 ha of the forest were defoliated by larvae of O. trigotephras. However, on defoliated Halimium halimifolium trees we found in addition to larvae and pupae of O. trigotephras, larvae and pupae of Anacampsis scintillella. In March 2012, pupae of Acrobasis consociella were observed on Q. coccifera in Jebel Abderrahmane and Sejnane to compete with O. trigotephras. Preliminary investigations of bioecology of A. consociella were carried out in the two forests. To estimate host plant infestations’, a direct counting was carried out on the host plant, yielding a mean number of shelters of 5.80 shelters for A. consociella and 0.24 for O. trigotephras at the two sites. About 30 shelters of A. consociella from Q. coccifera were collected to be analyzed in the lab. The mean number of larvae was 0.59 at Sejnane and 0.93 at Jebel Abderrahmane. Results show that the life cycle of A.
    [Show full text]
  • Bats Winter 2009Rljhdwvjae9 L
    BATS OF THE READING THE MENU WITH MONGOLIAN STEPPES BCI’S NEW LEADER DNA BARCODES WWW.BATCO N.ORG WINTER 2009 BATSBATSBAT CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL Volume 27, No. 4, WINTER 2009 P.O. Box 162603, Austin, Texas 78716 BATS (512) 327-9721 • Fax (512) 327-9724 FEATURES Publications Staff Director of Publications: Robert Locke BCI’s New Leader Photo Editor: Meera Banta 1 Graphic Artist: Jason Huerta Copyeditors: Angela England, Valerie Locke BATS welcomes queries from writers. Send your article proposal 2 Armed Rangers and Harsh Lands with a brief outline and a description of any photos to the ad- Conserving abandoned mines for endangered desert bats dress above or via e-mail to: [email protected]. Members: Please send changes of address and all cor res- by Jim Kennedy pondence to the address above or via e-mail to members@bat- con.org. Please include your label, if possible, and allow six weeks for the change of address. 6 Food Forensics Founder/President Emeritus: Dr. Merlin D. Tuttle New technology uses DNA to reveal what’s on the menu for bats Board of Trustees: John D. Mitchell, Chair by Robin Floyd and Elizabeth Clare Bert Grantges, Secretary Marshall T. Steves, Jr., Treasurer Anne-Louise Band; Eugenio Clariond Reyes; Bettina 9 Steppe Bats of Mongolia Mathis; Sandy Read; Walter C. Sedgwick; Marc Wein- A ‘Grassroots’ study of diversity in arid plains berger. Advisory Trustees: Sharon R. Forsyth; Elizabeth Ames by Nyambayar Batbayar, Ariunbold Jargalsaikhan Jones; Travis Mathis; Wilhelmina Robertson; William Scanlan, Jr.; Merlin D. Tuttle. & Sukhchuluun Gansukh Verne R. Read, Chairman Emeritus Scientific Advisory Board: Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera: Pyraloidea) SHILAP Revista De Lepidopterología, Vol
    SHILAP Revista de Lepidopterología ISSN: 0300-5267 [email protected] Sociedad Hispano-Luso-Americana de Lepidopterología España Asselbergs, J. E. F.; Seguna, A.; Sammut, P. Recent records of Pyraloidea species new to Malta, including two species new to the European fauna (Lepidoptera: Pyraloidea) SHILAP Revista de Lepidopterología, vol. 36, núm. 144, diciembre, 2008, pp. 465-471 Sociedad Hispano-Luso-Americana de Lepidopterología Madrid, España Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=45511220008 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative 465-471 Recent records of Pyral 15/12/08 16:37 Página 465 SHILAP Revta. lepid., 36 (144), diciembre 2008: 465-471 CODEN: SRLPEF ISSN:0300-5267 Recent records of Pyraloidea species new to Malta, including two species new to the European fauna (Lepidoptera: Pyraloidea) J. E. F. Asselbergs, A. Seguna & P. Sammut Abstract Acrobasis obliqua clusinella Zeller, 1848, Acrobasis centunculella (Mann, 1859), Psorosa dahliella (Treitschke, 1832), Psorosa mediterranella Amsel, 1953, Euzopherodes lutisignella (Mann, 1869), Delplanqueia inscriptella (Duponchel, 1836), Isauria dilucidella (Duponchel, 1836), Euchromius gozmanyi Bleszynski, 1961, Udea numeralis (Hübner, 1796), Ancylosis (Heterographis) costistrigella (Ragonot, 1890) and Caina deletella Ragonot, 1893 are new to the Maltese Islands. The latter two species are also the first records for the European fauna. Where known, data on the biology, the first stages and the distribution of the species is given. Additional notes on some other pyraloid species from Malta are also given.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera: Pyralidae)
    DAVID MARCHAND STRATÉGIES DE PONTE ET D’ALIMENTATION LARVAIRE CHEZ LA PYRALE DE LA CANNEBERGE, ACROBASIS VACCINII (LEPIDOPTERA: PYRALIDAE) Thèse présentée à la Faculté des études supérieures de l'Université Laval pour l’obtention du grade de Philosophiae Doctor (Ph. D.) Département de biologie FACULTÉ DES SCIENCES ET GÉNIE UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL QUÉBEC MAI 2003 © David Marchand, 2003 ii Résumé Chez les espèces d’insectes dont le développement larvaire nécessite plusieurs hôtes, la survie larvaire peut être dépendante à la fois du comportement d’oviposition des femelles et du comportement de recherche des larves. La présente thèse porte sur l'étude de ces deux comportements et leurs possibles impacts sur la performance larvaire de la pyrale de la canneberge, Acrobasis vaccinii (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), une espèce dont chaque larve a besoin de plusieurs fruits de canneberge, Vaccinium oxycoccos (Ericacae), pour compléter son développement. Dans un premier temps, j’ai démontré que les femelles en laboratoire pondent significativement plus souvent sur les plus gros fruits disponibles; la taille des larves sortant du premier fruit choisi par la femelle étant proportionnelle à la taille de ce fruit. Cependant, sur le terrain, cette préférence n’a pas été observée et mon étude met en évidence que la période d’oviposition survient tôt dans la saison, dès l’apparition des premiers fruits; ceci impliquant une faible variabilité dans la taille des sites de ponte disponibles. Cette étude démontre également une distribution hétérogène des fruits de canneberge en nature et une variabilité importante dans la production annuelle de fruits entre mes deux années d’étude. Le fait que les fruits puissent être rares certaines années serait une raison conduisant les femelles à accepter les fruits de plus faible qualité (fruits de petite taille).
    [Show full text]